Hello. First of all, thank you for the answers.
Secondly, I am sorry, I happened to send the wrong table. Here I put the complete tabulated result.
|
Comparison
|
Comprehension check
|
Confirmation Check
|
Clarification Request
|
|
Task 1
vs.
Task 2
|
.667
|
1.133
|
7.200*
|
|
Task 1
vs.
Task 3
|
1.133*
|
1.533
|
1.400
|
|
Task 2
vs.
Task 3
|
.467
|
2.667
|
5.800*
|
*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.
Previously, I analyzed these variables by using Repeated Measures ANOVA in SPSS to see the mean differences. As shown in the table, there are the same result numbers of mean difference (1.133) for different comparisons (task 1 vs 2) and (task 1 vs 3). Although they showed the same mean difference, only one shows significance. Also, 2.667 is higher than 1.533 etc. but why does it not show a significant difference? Are there any criteria for this? Or maybe it's because I didn't analyze it correctly.
I am looking forward to receiving your explanation. Thank you.
------------------------------
kiromil baroroh
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: Mon May 06, 2024 10:24 AM
From: Jon Peck
Subject: Bonferroni in Pairwise Comparisons
These are different variables. Why would you expect the tests to give the same results?
Second, you are only testing one post-hoc hypothesis, so there is no Bonferroni correction. Bonferroni adjusts the sig level as alpha/number of hypotheses, so it is just alpha with one test.
You may be thinking that the number of hypotheses adjusts across variables, but it is actually adjusted for the number of groups. If you do want a multiple-testing correction across variables, you can use the STATS PADJUST (Analyse > Descriptive Statistics > Calculate Adjusted p Values) extension command. If you don't have that installed, you can get it via Extensions > Extension Hub.
--